12 ms·

I think that it's really interesting that conversations about venture capital and conversations about engineering both get to be lumped into a more general conv

I think that it's really interesting that conversations about venture capital and conversations about engineering both get to be lumped into a more general conversation about sexism in Silicon Valley. A lot of engineers have a good bit to say against the existence of widespread sexism in engineering, myself included. Engineering in computer science has long been represented by a nearly nonexistent barrier to entry outside of one's capabilities and their relevance to the position. Even traditional, and technically very relevant, lateral predictors to output are such as formal education, are largely ignored. Your accomplishments and capabilities interviewing are ultimately what get the hire, with very few exceptions. Anybody who has been in a hiring position can speak to the utilitarian pursuit of the placement; race and sex are the last thing on the mind come hiring time. All of that being said, however, I don't find it remotely hard to believe that Ellen Pao's recounting of her experience in the world of venture capital is far from the truth. I'm actually relatively certain that she's spared us a good bit of the details. But this isn't engineering, this is finance; quite rarely about the utility of any particular individual in a role, and almost entirely centered around pretty horrible characteristics. Cronyism is the most important characteristic in the club, trading favors, trading connections, looking the other way, getting away with this, getting away with that. The whole thing is a zero sum game, because nobody within is creating any value, you're only ever vying for a piece of the pie baked by the outsiders who actually produce things. As Pao points out, any partner you have largely considers you as a mechanism by which they are to have less investment capital available themselves, and any senior sees you as a way to bubble up the greatest picks for them to skim off the top. The point is that the business is not about merit, it's about being in the club and playing ball. To deviate from the standards of the club just means you're less of a sure thing when it comes to being a crony, and it doesn't take much to understand why a woman is an outsider in a club like this. So when we talk about sexism in Silicon Valley, let's please not conflate these two very different businesses. One of them is made up of worker bees, and we don't care what kind of bee you are as long as you're outputting honey. The other one is literally Wall Street pretending like it's anything but.

icebraining 9y ago
I don't find it remotely hard to believe that Ellen Pao's recounting of her experience in the world of venture capital is far from the truth Can you clarify this? I'm confused because it seems at odds with the rest of your post.
- grabcocque 9y ago
  I read it as "our biases are subconscious". A lot of the white men being jerks to their female and ethnic minority colleagues aren't aware they're doing it, or if they are it's justified because it's a "meritocracy" and the techbros ascribe significantly more merit to whiteness and especially maleness.
  - peoplewindow 9y ago
    Given that reality is subjective, how would you separate "lots of men are being jerks and don't realise" from "lots of women are hyper-sensitive to perceived slights that aren't there and don't realise it"? I've seen so many accusations of sexism in tech by now that I tire of it. When investigated, it seems to always boil down to one of two things: 1. Some guy hit on me and I thought it was gross^Wharassment. 2. I feel a general aura of sexism that I can't pin down or concretely identify but I'm sure it's there, so I've become instantly triggered by mundane things. All too often the latter feels like women (and male feminists) on a power trip. The feelings of being offended aren't real, it's just a way to convince/force others to do what they want. I'm thinking of cases like the dongle incident for that. A trivial remark over nothing that led to guys getting fired. But the Damore memo is another good example. Guy points out that lots of scientists think men and women have different interests for genetic reasons, so maybe we should be more willing to discuss that -> outrage, firings, power successfully exercised. Nobody is ever actually offended by science, or even abstract arguments about science and politics, even if they may claim to be. The offence is manufactured to meet an end goal: the punishment of those who do not bow to the power of the ideology.
    - Powerofmene 9y ago
      >All too often the latter feels like women (and male feminists) on a power trip. The feelings of being offended aren't real, it's just a way to convince/force others to do what they want. Please explain this statement further. I am trying to understand how the person who is harassed is the person with the power or on a power trip as you put it. Wouldn't the best way to avoid such a scenario be to avoid the circumstance of making unwanted or unwelcome statements? How in the world can you definitely tell the feelings of being offended are not real?
smackay 9y ago
You are right that in order to make any progress there needs to be a way of disentangling this mess but you cannot simply create distance from the distasteful situations described in the article. It is important to realise that regardless of which league you are in, it is still the same game that is being played. This problem cannot be tackled head on - it's simply too pervasive and too corrosive. Perhaps a way out is to look to the values that we hold dear and develop more fully a sense of professional pride that takes merit and adds egality and decency so that being an Engineer means that you hold yourself to a higher standard in all aspects.
grey-area 9y ago
I don't find it remotely hard to believe that Ellen Pao's recounting of her experience in the world of venture capital is far from the truth. What, specifically, makes you say that?
_Codemonkeyism 9y ago
I agree with your "how utilitarian the hiring process is" but be aware that this starts earlier. As a CTO I was wondering how to hire more women for more diversity [1] because not enough women applied. After going to girls camps, meetups, talking to women with not much success (not due to the women), I asked some female engineers - especially one from Soundcloud, thanks! They told me my job ad is already wrong. This opened my eyes and the world was no longer the same. It caters to males with: We give you 1,2,3 and want you to have skills 4,5,6. Having having several job ads targetting several audiences helps a lot e.g. fresh from university, senior developers who have seen it all, women, dads who want 9-5. [1] essenially more diversity results in better ideas and market fit with a tradeoff of less productivity measured in quantity
- new299 9y ago
  Can you give a more explicit example of how the job Ad should look? I don't quite understand.
  - _Codemonkeyism 9y ago
    (These are generalizations as happens with marketing personas [1] - individual targetting with ads would be better, also for real I would spend more than 5 min to create those personas) Many women are more self-critical than many men. So if you have a huge list of needed skills, women might apply less often. Do write only the really relevant skills, don't copy and past from previous apps. Do not require what can easily be learned (e.g. JS frameworks). Add more about they why of your company, why do you exist? What makes your company really unique? Women might think about maternity, are you especially equipped to handle this? Women - again generalized - be interested in social interactions, how does your company provide them? They might fear sexism, how do you deal with that? Write one ad for this persona. Students from university are eager to try out the stuff they've learned, they want to learn new stuff and use the shiniest toys. They don't care if working longer. Write one ad for this persona. 35 year old dads have different priorities, and the job might not be their biggest priority to spend time on. So they might prefer 9-5 jobs. Write one ad for this persona. Senior developers might be older, have seen it all. They've been in the mill of new shiny toys for years, and everything looks the same. Write one ad for this persona. [1] http://www.romanpichler.com/blog/persona-template-for-agile-product-management/ http://www.romanpichler.com/blog/persona-template-for-agile-...
whipoodle 9y ago
I agree, they aren't particularly related and a lot of things get folded under the "tech" umbrella.
namdnay 9y ago
> Engineering in computer science has long been represented by a nearly nonexistent barrier to entry outside of one's capabilities and their relevance to the position [...] Your accomplishments and capabilities interviewing are ultimately what get the hire" I'd just like to highlight that this is specific to Silicon Valley, and maybe the wider startup/GAFA scene. It's definitely not the case in the "old school" in which 90% of software engineers work. If you're looking for a developer job in Accenture Bangalore, Citigroup London, or Lufthansa IT Frankfurt, I guarantee that your diploma matters more than your capabilities.
- santoshalper 9y ago
  I've made it to CTO/CIO/EVP level positions in Fortune 500 companies with no college degree, though admittedly outlier technical and social skills. My anecdotal experience does not match what you are describing. That said, I also think the person you are replying to misses the point in a big way. Just because hiring managers aren't discriminating overtly doesn't mean there are not serious sexism problems in the industry. Not the least of which is that many women don't want to work in the gross/creepy sausage-factory that is many IT shops. Hell, some dude a few posts up was saying he would quit if told to act professionally. How do you think that is going to go when a woman joins his team and it's time to take down the porno wallpaper?
  - arkh 9y ago
    "the gross/creepy sausage-factory that is many IT shops" Not sure the sexism is where you think it is. "How do you think that is going to go when a woman joins his team and it's time to take down the porno wallpaper?" I think you have not worked in a lot of IT shops. Never saw any porno items in there. Only shop I've seen porno wallpapers was in an auto parts warehouse and only in the male changing room.
golergka 9y ago
> nobody within is creating any value, you're only ever vying for a piece of the pie baked by the outsiders who actually produce things What? I wonder how anyone who has real interaction with VC and financial sphere in general can have such an opinion about the industry.
matt4077 9y ago
I fear that maybe there are things that we're so used to that we don't even notice them, kinda like David Foster Wallace' allegory of fish not noticing the water. The idea of there even being a completely objective way to evaluate people is already suspect. I'm pretty sure, for example, that there are many teams where spending long hours in the office will, all else being equal, be considered a good sign. And of course, when decisions about promotions are made, it doesn't hurt to have cultural rapport with your superiors. And that may include football, or being a useful teammate in Counterstrike more often than a shared appreciation of theatre. It's really hard to objectively evaluate programmers, and there are many disciplines where it was shown that they do discriminate even though they would profess to be completely objective. One famous example is the hiring of musicians for orchestras, where behind-the-curtain auditions resulted in many more women getting hired than before. Note that I'm pretty sure these people making hiring decisions did actually believe they were being objective. They did not intent to do any harm. But that's not enough. You have to actively work against some parts of human nature, and try to find ways to make it impossible for yourself to fall into such traps.
alexandercrohde 9y ago
I agree. And I hope this Ellen Pao issue cracks this system wide-open. Because there is systematic bias in finance (would they put somebody with a tattoo on a board? somebody with a nose piercing? somebody who didn't go to college? As well as minority underrepresentation) I can't imagine if boards did blind interviews, or even merit-based interviews. I think the uncomfortable truth is, we in engineering try so hard to make our own little meritocracy, but we live underneath a bunch of spoiled 1% capitalers who see people who have less than a million (or of low class) as non-people and they keep wrecking our work [because they aren't actually as smart as Sergey Brin for example] and turning everything we make into ad-tech. (All the while patting themselves on the back)

icebraining 9y ago

I don't find it remotely hard to believe that Ellen Pao's recounting of her experience in the world of venture capital is far from the truth Can you clarify this? I'm confused because it seems at odds with the rest of your post.

grabcocque 9y ago
I read it as "our biases are subconscious". A lot of the white men being jerks to their female and ethnic minority colleagues aren't aware they're doing it, or if they are it's justified because it's a "meritocracy" and the techbros ascribe significantly more merit to whiteness and especially maleness.
- peoplewindow 9y ago
  Given that reality is subjective, how would you separate "lots of men are being jerks and don't realise" from "lots of women are hyper-sensitive to perceived slights that aren't there and don't realise it"? I've seen so many accusations of sexism in tech by now that I tire of it. When investigated, it seems to always boil down to one of two things: 1. Some guy hit on me and I thought it was gross^Wharassment. 2. I feel a general aura of sexism that I can't pin down or concretely identify but I'm sure it's there, so I've become instantly triggered by mundane things. All too often the latter feels like women (and male feminists) on a power trip. The feelings of being offended aren't real, it's just a way to convince/force others to do what they want. I'm thinking of cases like the dongle incident for that. A trivial remark over nothing that led to guys getting fired. But the Damore memo is another good example. Guy points out that lots of scientists think men and women have different interests for genetic reasons, so maybe we should be more willing to discuss that -> outrage, firings, power successfully exercised. Nobody is ever actually offended by science, or even abstract arguments about science and politics, even if they may claim to be. The offence is manufactured to meet an end goal: the punishment of those who do not bow to the power of the ideology.
  - Powerofmene 9y ago
    >All too often the latter feels like women (and male feminists) on a power trip. The feelings of being offended aren't real, it's just a way to convince/force others to do what they want. Please explain this statement further. I am trying to understand how the person who is harassed is the person with the power or on a power trip as you put it. Wouldn't the best way to avoid such a scenario be to avoid the circumstance of making unwanted or unwelcome statements? How in the world can you definitely tell the feelings of being offended are not real?

smackay 9y ago

You are right that in order to make any progress there needs to be a way of disentangling this mess but you cannot simply create distance from the distasteful situations described in the article. It is important to realise that regardless of which league you are in, it is still the same game that is being played. This problem cannot be tackled head on - it's simply too pervasive and too corrosive. Perhaps a way out is to look to the values that we hold dear and develop more fully a sense of professional pride that takes merit and adds egality and decency so that being an Engineer means that you hold yourself to a higher standard in all aspects.

grey-area 9y ago

I don't find it remotely hard to believe that Ellen Pao's recounting of her experience in the world of venture capital is far from the truth. What, specifically, makes you say that?

_Codemonkeyism 9y ago

I agree with your "how utilitarian the hiring process is" but be aware that this starts earlier. As a CTO I was wondering how to hire more women for more diversity [1] because not enough women applied. After going to girls camps, meetups, talking to women with not much success (not due to the women), I asked some female engineers - especially one from Soundcloud, thanks! They told me my job ad is already wrong. This opened my eyes and the world was no longer the same. It caters to males with: We give you 1,2,3 and want you to have skills 4,5,6. Having having several job ads targetting several audiences helps a lot e.g. fresh from university, senior developers who have seen it all, women, dads who want 9-5. [1] essenially more diversity results in better ideas and market fit with a tradeoff of less productivity measured in quantity

new299 9y ago
Can you give a more explicit example of how the job Ad should look? I don't quite understand.
- _Codemonkeyism 9y ago
  (These are generalizations as happens with marketing personas [1] - individual targetting with ads would be better, also for real I would spend more than 5 min to create those personas) Many women are more self-critical than many men. So if you have a huge list of needed skills, women might apply less often. Do write only the really relevant skills, don't copy and past from previous apps. Do not require what can easily be learned (e.g. JS frameworks). Add more about they why of your company, why do you exist? What makes your company really unique? Women might think about maternity, are you especially equipped to handle this? Women - again generalized - be interested in social interactions, how does your company provide them? They might fear sexism, how do you deal with that? Write one ad for this persona. Students from university are eager to try out the stuff they've learned, they want to learn new stuff and use the shiniest toys. They don't care if working longer. Write one ad for this persona. 35 year old dads have different priorities, and the job might not be their biggest priority to spend time on. So they might prefer 9-5 jobs. Write one ad for this persona. Senior developers might be older, have seen it all. They've been in the mill of new shiny toys for years, and everything looks the same. Write one ad for this persona. [1] http://www.romanpichler.com/blog/persona-template-for-agile-product-management/ http://www.romanpichler.com/blog/persona-template-for-agile-...

whipoodle 9y ago

I agree, they aren't particularly related and a lot of things get folded under the "tech" umbrella.

namdnay 9y ago

> Engineering in computer science has long been represented by a nearly nonexistent barrier to entry outside of one's capabilities and their relevance to the position [...] Your accomplishments and capabilities interviewing are ultimately what get the hire" I'd just like to highlight that this is specific to Silicon Valley, and maybe the wider startup/GAFA scene. It's definitely not the case in the "old school" in which 90% of software engineers work. If you're looking for a developer job in Accenture Bangalore, Citigroup London, or Lufthansa IT Frankfurt, I guarantee that your diploma matters more than your capabilities.

santoshalper 9y ago
I've made it to CTO/CIO/EVP level positions in Fortune 500 companies with no college degree, though admittedly outlier technical and social skills. My anecdotal experience does not match what you are describing. That said, I also think the person you are replying to misses the point in a big way. Just because hiring managers aren't discriminating overtly doesn't mean there are not serious sexism problems in the industry. Not the least of which is that many women don't want to work in the gross/creepy sausage-factory that is many IT shops. Hell, some dude a few posts up was saying he would quit if told to act professionally. How do you think that is going to go when a woman joins his team and it's time to take down the porno wallpaper?
- arkh 9y ago
  "the gross/creepy sausage-factory that is many IT shops" Not sure the sexism is where you think it is. "How do you think that is going to go when a woman joins his team and it's time to take down the porno wallpaper?" I think you have not worked in a lot of IT shops. Never saw any porno items in there. Only shop I've seen porno wallpapers was in an auto parts warehouse and only in the male changing room.

golergka 9y ago

> nobody within is creating any value, you're only ever vying for a piece of the pie baked by the outsiders who actually produce things What? I wonder how anyone who has real interaction with VC and financial sphere in general can have such an opinion about the industry.

matt4077 9y ago

I fear that maybe there are things that we're so used to that we don't even notice them, kinda like David Foster Wallace' allegory of fish not noticing the water. The idea of there even being a completely objective way to evaluate people is already suspect. I'm pretty sure, for example, that there are many teams where spending long hours in the office will, all else being equal, be considered a good sign. And of course, when decisions about promotions are made, it doesn't hurt to have cultural rapport with your superiors. And that may include football, or being a useful teammate in Counterstrike more often than a shared appreciation of theatre. It's really hard to objectively evaluate programmers, and there are many disciplines where it was shown that they do discriminate even though they would profess to be completely objective. One famous example is the hiring of musicians for orchestras, where behind-the-curtain auditions resulted in many more women getting hired than before. Note that I'm pretty sure these people making hiring decisions did actually believe they were being objective. They did not intent to do any harm. But that's not enough. You have to actively work against some parts of human nature, and try to find ways to make it impossible for yourself to fall into such traps.

alexandercrohde 9y ago

I agree. And I hope this Ellen Pao issue cracks this system wide-open. Because there is systematic bias in finance (would they put somebody with a tattoo on a board? somebody with a nose piercing? somebody who didn't go to college? As well as minority underrepresentation) I can't imagine if boards did blind interviews, or even merit-based interviews. I think the uncomfortable truth is, we in engineering try so hard to make our own little meritocracy, but we live underneath a bunch of spoiled 1% capitalers who see people who have less than a million (or of low class) as non-people and they keep wrecking our work [because they aren't actually as smart as Sergey Brin for example] and turning everything we make into ad-tech. (All the while patting themselves on the back)